or Connect
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Teaching videos, CDs, etc

post #1 of 25
Thread Starter 
What if PSIA or HH or whoever, produced a "correspondance" course on how to teach? I threw that into the mix on Hyperchangecafe this afternoon. Only JR has responded. But think of for a second. A rookie who is a Level I candidate can take the Level I course and be completely prepared for the exam; maybe have the teaching, MA, waived because the candidate demonstrated good teaching skill. And the candidate can do it on hers/his own time, say, in the summer. Before you go off on me as it is inpractical, think of the possibilities. Besides, we should not have any long missives by SCSA trying to compare Apples to IBMs.

Your thoughts?

RH
post #2 of 25
I, for one do not think it is crazy. It is a logical extension of the portfolio system. I have long advocated the online written exam process, and have suggested to Dogger and others in RM to provide the video for exam MA either online or for those with slowwwww PCs, on CD-Rom, to be completed and sent back. I believe within 5 seasons, we will not even recognize the ed/cert process, if we open our minds to the possibilities.
A first good start would be the upcoming??? website upgrade.
Dogger if you're still lurking...the RM one still has that article by Kris "the gravity game" on it and hasn't been updated in 2 years!!!!
post #3 of 25
Wow, I like it. Where do I sign up?
post #4 of 25
Fitness has been doing this for awhile, especially for specific specialties.
post #5 of 25
A subject that is valid, and needs to be worked on. Some of us have been promoting it at my ski school. We might have a budget. I hope so. It's certainly the next logical step, isn't it?

I am amused by the better content on the psia-nw site. Not much on the psia-rm.

------------------
Hey what's down this run? SnoKarver


<FONT size="1">

[This message has been edited by SnoKarver (edited July 09, 2001).]</FONT>
post #6 of 25
I like the idea of the courses being available on line or on a CD. However, I do not like the idea of any part of the exam being done on line, or otherwise away from the examiners. The reason is that someone could easily take 3 days, and get help, to do the exam. The problem with that, is that when we teach, we don't have 3 days, or even 3 hours (sometimes barely 3 minutes) to make an asessment of a student and provide proper input. And if there are people out there motivated simply to get the pin, then they would not be honest about taking the exam. If you thought we had too many bad instructors with pins now, implement a process like on-line exams, and it would get really bad. No, the exam needs to be done on the hill and in front of examiners.

Also, at least in the east, the written exam (the multiple choice part) is not reviewed with the candidates after they take it, because they don't want the questions getting out to others who will be taking the exam in the somewhat near future. This problem stems from the fact that they don't have enough questions to have new ones on every exam, and they don't have the funds to pay people to sit around for a few weeks dreaming up questions. So if we gave out the questions on-line, then there is no way to honestly evalusate people's understanding, since they would be given the answers.
post #7 of 25
John, while I recognize the potential for abuse with online exam administration, I also see the potential for more on-snow evaluation by getting the written and video to MA to lesson plan online.
The debate goes back to the "how long should the exam be" issue. Until there is a significant compensation revolution in the US, the Bundesportheim type certification process is out...just not a "real" career here (or so my mother tells me).
So a candidate must validate his skill levels in a 2 or 3 day format. A written, with at randomly (by % category) drawn questions like ACT testing is practically here already (thanks JR). The writtens are already being pilfered and reproduced...in RM they are open book and proctored at night months ahead.
Anyone who has administered or taken and exam realizes that video-based, movement analysis is by far the most fair, but even now candidates are out in the hall asking "did you get skier 4....what did you see?". Anyone who has ever been in an exam knows the teaching scenarios are canned.
These issues are inseperable aspects of exam taking. By taking less time writing, watching and talking off the snow...we would spend more time on the snow, where it counts.
An examiner having read the candidates responses online, whether subjective (proposed lesson plan from MA) or objective (from written exam portion) can easily acertain a candidates true comprehension level on the snow, through application.
I believe a comprehensive online "college" will work, with continuing ed courses etc., but agree, ya gotta do it, on the snow...face to face...with shovel in hand!"
<FONT size="1">

[This message has been edited by Robin (edited July 10, 2001).]</FONT>
post #8 of 25
I like the idea of giving the written and MA parts of the exam at the candidates home hill, proctored by someone. I see that as a viable solution.

Also, after I wrote the last message, I got to thinking. With technology, it could actually work, because if it was taken on-line (don't know if this would work on a CD), it could be timed, allowing the person, say, 30 minutes to complete a section. And it could be done so that the first time the person sees the first question or video, the clock starts.

Other than that, I agree with the "how long should the exam take?" question. Spending half of the 1st day inside, then the second half is all that's left for the examiner, is a problem.

Maybe the on-hill exams should all be done via wireless video conferencing. The candidates have one videographer from their mountain video the candidates taking the exam, and the examiner watches in real time. The examiner demos and gives direction from his hill with his own videographer. How cool would that be??
post #9 of 25
JohnH
Also there is great new technology out there that now allows for what in the computer industry we call adaptive testing. This is where the testing system evaluates each answer you give and changes the testing pattern. Not necessarly to make the test harder but to be truly valid. It can also check response times as part of it's program so for instance a question is put out that asks about wedge turns. and the answer is an obscure one that only someone who knew a lot about gliding wedges would be able to answer. If you got it right quickly (<1 second) the program may skip the rest of the questions in this area. however if you missed it or took too long, it might ask you more specific questions that would make you prove you understood the question but maybe the way the question was worded is what made you get the wrong answer. Since the test is adaptive, the chances of people swaping answers is less since they will most likely not get the same test. It make the test more about understanding the concept then memorizing the answers.

However I didn't even see anything in the original post about taking the tests on line. just having teaching videos and cds avail. I assume there would be sample tests but fully expected the testing to be done in person. Interesting concept.
post #10 of 25
dchan,

My brother-in-law said he took an on-line exam that worked exatly as you said, for his grad school entrance exam (GMAT?).

I was responding to Robin's statement that he has been advocating on-line written exams, as well as Rick's proposal to waive the teaching and MA parts of the exam "because the candidate...."

I think it turned into an interesting discussion. What's your relativity on theory??? Or is that not relavant?
post #11 of 25
interesting thing about adaptive testing is if you really know your stuff, the test goes real fast because it gets shorter! A+ certification used adaptive testing for some of it's earlier tests. I don't know about now. When I took A+ in 94 the test was 25-50 questions. I think I got 26 questions. I was shocked when I thought I was about half way through the test, the computer screen came up "Congratulations you passed!"

All we need now are skiing simulators so we can do the skiing training in a dry warm room. Ha!
post #12 of 25
It is not only the first morning that is unnecessarily poorly time managed, the second afternoon is shot while examiners are tabulating results. In some divisions, results are mailed out. I believe examiners should be available and accountable for post result interviews. Having already scored written, MA and lesson planning from some online application would fast track the pass/fail protocol.
It amazes me that some divisions still do MA on hill, "that guy...no, the guy in red...oh, he stopped" analysis. Depending on an individuals MA model (ie. "big picture", "feet first"), whatever, a nanosecond snapshot does a disservice to all. Videoed subjects in the RM, for instance, start with the subject discussing goals, habits, age, injuries etc. from which a profile may be developed...it works great! If the candidate is primarily a childrens instructor, a sample is provided...from there, extended thinking is applied, "ok..it's icy"..."what if he was visually impaired". Consistency is achieved because all the ed staff has reviewed skiers 1-8, determined movement patterns, skill bias and cause and effect. They have established steriotypical lesson plan approaches and isolated potential outcomes...they are on the same page. Once on snow, the rubber hits the pavement, "Bob, you had skier #6, discuss why you took him in this direction,...you were vague on this relationship, show us how...".
Why are successes in one division not incorporated in others...what do these guys talk about at national? IIDIIINV..."If I didn't invent it, it's not valid"!<FONT size="1">

[This message has been edited by Robin (edited July 10, 2001).]</FONT>
post #13 of 25
Bob, looks like we are stepping on each other. By the way, I personally like the questions. Some candidates whined about the "who has the most WC wins? and "obscure Jouberian terminology" but I think (and I believe you do too) an historical perspective is valid!
Have you collaborated with JR on the national bank?
While definitely off-topic, I believe it is incredibly important to establish criteria for the pass/fail, numerical system based on standard describers for consistent measurement.
post #14 of 25
BobB
I'll do a little more research regarding the adaptive testing and send you an email off line. It's pretty complicated but the gist of it would be the questions would need to be Hierarchical as more important, less important, or general/detail. Then an evaluation system would be necessary to decide if a question answered correctly would mean skipping some questions or warrant more detail... etc etc etc..
Arrggg. Access data base? Sorry Bob, I hate MS access databases. As user friendly as they are they are slow, cumbersome, fat and flat.. But that's Microsoft. we can deal.... More off line...
post #15 of 25
also off the subject, Robin, was it you that was looking for the MA video for me? I'm still interested..

>>"obscure Jouberian terminology" << you mean like "Avalement" "reploiment" Like BobB mentioned in the past. fortunatly our skis don't speak french <FONT size="1">

[This message has been edited by dchan (edited July 10, 2001).]</FONT>
post #16 of 25
Since level 1 is a "get them in the sustem, paying dues" kind of thing, why not do it online, or open book take home. I think, here in PSIA-W, the Nordic Level 1 is take home. Also we do "in house" Level 1 alpine certification. Having been an "in house" trainer, and shadowing exams, I think people get more out of "in house", than a day clinic, and a day exam.

Note to Bob Barnes. I don't know what your questions are like, but our written exams are terrible. I recall at both 2&3 having to leave all sorts of notes about my answers. I think I had to go as far as paraphrasing a number of questions, and then providing answers. Of course, these questions are only a reflection of the quality of our manuals and study guides. Here is a thought. How important is it for a ski instructor to be able to perform well on a written test? For that matter, how important is it for an instructor to do well in the artificial exam world? There has to be a better way.
post #17 of 25
The exam in the east seems to be just like the one in RM. We have the video MA, which we also use as the reference subject on the hill. Except the written is still done 1st morning. I agree completely that the end of the final day is a study in poor time management. Especially when, like me, you may have an 11 hour drive home afterwards. I remember getting home at 4am after my Associate (L2).
post #18 of 25
Dchan, sorry for the delay...I have not found my copy and am still awaiting email response from those who may have one. One guy,(he may have my copy) was going to re-edit it.
post #19 of 25
Robin,
It's ok. just curious. do you have an epicski email?
post #20 of 25
Nope...do I want one?...or, how do I get one?
post #21 of 25
Robin,
Go to www.epicski.com and register for an epicski.com email. Free and web based. Then you can get periodic emails from people on the board without giving out your personal or work email address on the board. Kind of nice for initial contact so you don't have to advertise your personal info if you don't want.
post #22 of 25
Whoo Hooo! Now i am Robin@epicski.com, remember everyone to keep those cards and letters!
post #23 of 25
The RM level I test is "take home" and I'll tell you it is not easy. I spent a lot of time doing it and missed a bunch of answers. I just pulled out my score card and am ashamed to say I missed nine questions! O.K. so I make Gump look smart.

I'm not the smartest guy in the world, but, you wouldn't think any open book take home test would be difficult.

The test is well written and forces the student into the manual and "the encyclopedia".

The student brings the test to the on-snow exam and turns it in as they arrive. It is scored by the time the day is over and factored in with the m.a. and the skiing.

I have to use this "forum" to make mention of my examiner. His name is Dave Holdcraft. The guy was tremendous. He put all of us at ease at the start. He was kind/helpful and made the day a lot of fun. The weather was terrible and the man did not take a break all day. We had lunch while he kept working. It was predicted to be warm and sunny and it was cold with heavy snow all day.
post #24 of 25
Thread Starter 
Great responses! While I was in Grand Junction at a Water Quality Control Commission hearing, you guys were having fun!

My goal in this thread is to see if there is real interest in my idea. I don't have the wherewithall to produce a product like I envision. My interest is to learn to teach as well as I can. Currently, as far as I know, there are no "real" ski teaching courses out there. Moreover, I am concerned that if, say, PSIA produced a course or two, would it be available to non-members? And I am not sure the a course would be available to non-PMTS.Org (Assoc. of PMTS Direct Parallel Instructors) folks. But if it were done by an independent producer, it could be available to anyone with $100 or so.

Here is what I think a course should consist of:
Teaching basics
Movement analysis
Biomechanics
Guest centered instruction
Basic alignment
Exam prep for each level

This can, and should, be done for both PSIA and PMTS.

BTW, the PMTS written test is open book/take home of about 50 questions. It is surprising the amount of people who don't score high. It is not a simple test. All of the material is covered in the two day training clinic during accreditation.

RH
post #25 of 25
Thread Starter 
I would like to put this thread at the top to see if there are any more comments on this topic.

Anyone?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Ski Instruction & Coaching